Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2009(4)BomCR414; 2009(111)BomLR502
..... sharan contends that wcl has come into existence because of nationalization of coal mining activity in the country due to coal mines (nationalization) act, 1973. w.c.l. receives lands for its activities by three modes i.e. by acquisition under coal bearing areas (acquisition and development) act, 1957 -- hereinafter referred to as coal bearing act, by acquisition under coal mines (nationalisation) act, 1973 -- hereinafter referred to as .nationalisation act.; by acquisition under land acquisition act and by purchase. the impugned demand is in relation to lands which thus came ..... correctly after ascertaining the actual facts. the matter was remitted back with observation that issuance of the proper show cause notice or a supplementary notice to the wcl was essential in the matter. this is sufficient to demonstrate the inappropriateness in preliminary objection sought to be raised by the state government here. in case of munic ipal commissioner of dumdum muni ipality v. indian tourism development corporation reported at : (1995)5scc251 , hon. apex court ..... providing for reserves etc. is to be made over to central government by airport authority. sections 21 to 24 which contain certain regulatory measures concerning the finances of airport authority are also noticed. chapter vi with title 'miscellaneous' which require authority to prepare and submit to central government annual report giving accounts of its activities during the financial year, activities proposed to be undertaken .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1980Bom168
1. The plaintiffs -- Tata Engineering and Locomotive Company Limited, the manufacturers of Tata diesel vehicles, have filed the present suit for the recovery of a sum of Rs. 1,67,835/-being the arrears of monthly hire instalments in respect of three vehicles given under hire purchase agreements to the 1st defendants-Bharat Mining Corporation Limited with interest on the arrears of monthly hire charges at the rate of 1 per cent per mensem from 1st May 1974, till payment. The 2nd defendant was a guarantor. The 2nd defendant has, according to the plaintiffs, guaranteed the payment of the amounts due under the hire purchase agreements. The 3rd defendant is the Manager appointed under the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973. The 4th defendants-the Coal India Limited is incorporated under the Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973, and its previous name was the Coal Mines Authority Limited.2. According to the plaintiffs, by three separate and identical hire purchase agreements in writing ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1984Bom174
Jamdar, J.1. Appellant M/s. Oriental Coal Company Ltd. has preferred these two appeals being aggrieved by the two decrees passed in favour of the respective respondent, but as the main question in these two appeals relates to the maintainability of the suit in view of the provisions of the Coal mines (Nationalisatin)Act, 1973, the appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.2. M/s. Oriental Coal Company Ltd. was the owner of Kamptee Coliery. The respondents supplied good s on credit to the appellant-Company. The respondent in First Appeal No.33 of 1980 M/s. Mohanlal KISANLA, A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM, SUPPLIOED BAMBOOS (Ballis) worth Rs. 62,294-20 under Bill NOS. e-2 e-3 AND e-4 dated 29-1-1973. The appellant paid Rs. 2,2293-40 towards Bill No E-3 and gave two cheque of Rs. 5,000/- each to M/s. Mohanlal Kisanlal on 30th Jan., 1973. Both these cheque dishonoured in view of th eCoal Mines (Taking over of Mangagement) Act, 1973, which, by virtue of S....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2009(111)BomLR3524; 2009(6)MhLj398
C.L. Pangarkar, J.1. Rule. Returnable forthwith.2. Heard finally with consent of parties.3. This is an appeal against the order passed by the Civil Judge Senior Division whereby he allowed an application under Order 7 Rule 11 Civil Procedure Code and rejected the plaint. The appellantsplaintiffs instituted a suit for specific performance of contract and permanent injunction. Plaintiff No. 1 is the businessman of Nagpur and mainly deals in coal mining. He has therefore an experience in the field of mining while plaintiff No. 2 is also a successful businessman and has an experience in the field of sponge iron and steel. Defendant No. 1 is a public limited company and No. 2 is its director. The said Company was incorporated in the year 2001. When the company was incorporated authorised capital of the said company was Rs. 10 lac while the paid up capital was Rs. 5 lac. It is a public limited company. It is alleged that since inception the said company was being only managed by defendant No...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2007(6)ALLMR611; 2007(5)BomCR481; (2007)109BOMLR1959; 2008(1)MhLj753
P.R. Borkar, J.1. This is a petition filed by the Proprietor of M/s Akanksha International, which has purchased the land, building, plant and machinery of M/s Amar Amit Jalna Alloys Private Limited in auction sale conducted by the secured creditor under the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Securitisation Act, 2002'), for direction to the respondent Electricity Distribution Company to consider application for fresh electricity connection to the petitioner and to quash and set aside the letter dated 1.6.2007 issued by the respondent to the petitioner as illegal. By the said letter the respondent has insisted on the petitioner to pay an amount of Rs. 3,30,78,926.87 plus interest which were arrears of electricity charges due from erstwhile consumer M/s Amar Amit Jalna Alloys Private Limited.2. The petitioner stated that the State Bank of India, Jalna Branch had granted fi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1991(1)BomCR160; (1990)92BOMLR492; (1993)IIILLJ277Bom
Mrs. Sujata Manohar, J 1. Petitioner - The National Textile Corporation (South Maharashtra) Ltd.- is a Company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. By virtue of the provisions of the Textile Undertakings (Taking over of Management) Act, 1983, the management, inter alia, of Textile Mills known as Finlay Mills and the Gold Mohur Mills - Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 herein is vested in the petitioners. 2. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 P.J. Kapadia and Mrs. H.R. Chokshi were the employees of the two mills Respondent No. 4 and 5, who were employed in the retail cloth shop of these mills. The 2nd respondent was employed as a salesman and the 3rd respondent was employed as a sales-girl. On 8th May 1980 a charge-sheet was issued by the said mills to respondent No. 2. On 20.5.1980 a charge-sheet was issued to respondent No. 3. Both the charge- sheets were in respect of a cash memo dated 12.4.1980 prepared by the 3rd respondent at the instance of; the 2nd respondent. It seems that th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1991(4)BomCR301
D.R. Dhanuka, J.1. The plaintiff has taken out this notice of motion for appointment of Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay, as receiver of the suit equipments described in Schedule (Exhibit 'F' to the plaint) with all powers under Order XI, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure including the power to take actual physical possession of the said equipment and to hand over the same to the plaintiff and for various orders of interim injunctions. The defendant has resisted the notice of motion on several grounds.2. By an order dated 26th April, 1991, Jhunjhunuwala, J., appointed the Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay, as ad interim receiver in terms of prayer (f) of the notice of motion and also granted limited interim injunction in terms of prayer (g) thereof. Being aggrieved by the said order, the defendant preferred an appeal, being Appeal No. 521 of 1991. Pursuant to the orders passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench, the Court Receiver has taken symbolic possession of the abovereferred eq...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1986(2)BomCR315
C.S. Dharmadhikari, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay and others against the order passed by the Principal Judge of the Bombay City Civil Court, Bombay allowing the appeal filed by the respondent and setting aside the eviction order passed against him by the competent authority. It is an admitted position that the respondent Qureshi was an employee of the Bombay Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking. He had signed an agreement of leave and license and had agreed to abide by the occupancy rules. He retired from service of the Undertaking on attaining the age of superannuating. The competent authority, therefore, called upon him to vacate the premises allotted to him since the leave and licence agreement stood revoked on the retirement. Since no reply was received from him a show cause notice was served on him to show cause within 14 days as to why the eviction order should not be made against him. The respondent was also given a re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1991(62)FLR601]; (1992)IILLJ111Bom
Sugla, J.1. The challenge in this petition is to the legality and validity of the order dated September 23, 1986 passed by the Industrial Court and Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 in Appeal (PGA) No. 50 of 1985.2. One Shri Gopal Laxman Martal (since deceased) was employed as a workman in the Textile Mill of the original Opponent No. 1 since April 1, 1944. He retired on April 1, 1983. His salary, at the time of retirement, was about Rs. 1150/- per month. As gratuity due to him was not paid by the Textile Mill, he filed application (P&A;) 253 of 1983 on June 6, 1983 before the Controlling Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (for short, Gratuity Act). On October 18, 1983, the management of the Textile Mills was taken over by the Central Government under Textile Undertakings (Taking Over of Management) Act, 1983 (Act No. 40 of 1983), (for short the 'Taking Over Act'). On March 8, 1984 he made an application for taking the petitioner Corporation a p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2007(2)ALLMR110; 2007(1)BomCR329
F.I. Rebello, J.1. The creative judicial interpretation of Article 21 by our constitutional Courts, has broadened our vision, in understanding the expression 'right to life'. Preventing degradation of our ecology and protection of our environment, including the right to clean drinking water and pollutant free atmosphere are some of its facets. Ecological factors as judicially understood, indisputably are relevant considerations in Town and Country Planning Statutes. Courts to preserve the environment and ecology of 'Earth' our home for the present and future generations whilst interpreting environmental laws, lean in favour of protection. The questions raised by the petitioners and which fall for our consideration, give rise to a host of legal issues. Can the State, citing its financial inability to provide housing to encroachers on public and private lands residing in structures which came up before 1-1-1995 to whom it has granted protection from eviction or its inability to free RG a...
Tag this Judgment!